Coronavirus COVID-19

[AZGrizFan]

Back to their lives. By all getting infected at the same time. That's how many hospitilizations at 10% of those who are infected? 5%? 3%? How big are Sacramento's hospitals?

There's a reason a White House with the most economy-obsessed President in history, and a huge number of Republican governers, have had no choice but to eat crow and backtrack on this shit.

No fucking shit. I'm not good at math, data analytics, graphs, etc, and even me and Trump now get it. It's amazing how many people don't. You will see more of this coming over the next few months as the self centered unstable geniuses continue to lose their shit.

https://thebulwark.com/newsletter-issue ... C1-GgkLEhk

Let the high risk groups continue to isolate. The other 95% of the country needs to get the fuck back to work.

[kalm]

No fucking shit. I'm not good at math, data analytics, graphs, etc, and even me and Trump now get it. It's amazing how many people don't. You will see more of this coming over the next few months as the self centered unstable geniuses continue to lose their shit.

https://thebulwark.com/newsletter-issue ... C1-GgkLEhk

Let the high risk groups continue to isolate. The other 95% of the country needs to get the fuck back to work.

Yes they do. But how much of that 95% is due to mitigation practices?

[89Hen]

At this point Fox and CNN are almost polar opposites of each other ideologically, but where they are similar is in their extreme bias and their sensationalism of what they say. CNN is the left's version of Fox at this point

There are only a handful of folks here that would disagree with that.

Case in point...

False equivalcy. CNN is left-leaning, but nowhere near the State Media that FoxNews has become.

[Silenoz]

No fucking shit. I'm not good at math, data analytics, graphs, etc, and even me and Trump now get it. It's amazing how many people don't. You will see more of this coming over the next few months as the self centered unstable geniuses continue to lose their shit.

https://thebulwark.com/newsletter-issue ... C1-GgkLEhk

Let the high risk groups continue to isolate. The other 95% of the country needs to get the fuck back to work.

Well this is America, and obesity is considered high risk, so I don't know about anything remotely close to 95%
https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-ar ... 15/5818333

Again, you let this thing run rampant, and most people are gonna deal with the shittiest cold of their lives for two weeks, and then maybe some breathing issues for another month. But for a chunk of the people you know, some of whom are under 50 and otherwise healthy, it's gonna be ventilation, intubation, possibly permanent lung or heart issues, and/or death. And when that overwhelms the ICU it's gonna be 5x as many deaths as it would have been.

[Ivytalk]

No fucking shit. I'm not good at math, data analytics, graphs, etc, and even me and Trump now get it. It's amazing how many people don't. You will see more of this coming over the next few months as the self centered unstable geniuses continue to lose their shit.

https://thebulwark.com/newsletter-issue ... C1-GgkLEhk

Let the high risk groups continue to isolate. The other 95% of the country needs to get the fuck back to work.

Mr. Sensitivity.

And how do you know that you and Mrs. AZ are immune to this, simply because you are under 65?

[kalm]

Let the high risk groups continue to isolate. The other 95% of the country needs to get the fuck back to work.

Well this is America, and obesity is considered high risk, so I don't know about anything remotely close to 95%
https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-ar ... 15/5818333

Again, you let this thing run rampant, and most people are gonna deal with the shittiest cold of their lives for two weeks, and then maybe some breathing issues for another month. But for a chunk of the people you know, some of whom are under 50 and otherwise healthy, it's gonna be ventilation, intubation, possibly permanent lung or heart issues, and/or death. And when that overwhelms the ICU it's gonna be 5x as many deaths as it would have been.

Not mention if you have emergency medical needs not related to the virus.

Math is hard.

[CID1990]

Such bullshit

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

RIght? Those pesky facts....

My favorite is when news agencies use bad scales in their graphs.

Like this




https://www.mediamatters.org/fox-friend ... fox-charts



The Point for You, AZ and CID: All outlets lie, mislead and peddle falsehoods. Quit acting like CNN is the only one.

Where have I defended one outlet over another?

Do I need to put a fucking disclaimer when I point out a specific example of media malfeasance? Seems like a waste of time. Can I put it in my siggy so you won’t think I harbor secret affinity for FOX News (which has zero overseas presence)?

[UNI88]

Let the high risk groups continue to isolate. The other 95% of the country needs to get the fuck back to work.

Well this is America, and obesity is considered high risk, so I don't know about anything remotely close to 95%
https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-ar ... 15/5818333

Again, you let this thing run rampant, and most people are gonna deal with the shittiest cold of their lives for two weeks, and then maybe some breathing issues for another month. But for a chunk of the people you know, some of whom are under 50 and otherwise healthy, it's gonna be ventilation, intubation, possibly permanent lung or heart issues, and/or death. And when that overwhelms the ICU it's gonna be 5x as many deaths as it would have been.

It could take 18 months to develop a vaccine and can get this under control. Can we afford to keep shelter in place and other restrictions going for another 17 months? What is the bigger risk? The lives that might be lost or the damage to the economy (and resulting loss of jobs/access to healthcare and increased depression, addiction, suicides, etc.). At some point are we better off quarantining the those who are at the highest risk and moving forward?

[JohnStOnge]

Ok. I posted a while back in this thread that I thought the Administration was using inflated death estimates during a press conference in order to be able to later come back and claim that they did a good job. Now the news is full of the story that 100,000 to 200,000 deaths were predicted but a new estimate is about 61,000.

Here is the problem: There was never any reference to where that 100,000 to 200,000 range came from. The model that they're referring to as now predicting about 61,000 is the University of Washington model. As I type it is providing a point estimate of 61,545 deaths.

Problem is, THAT model wasn't predicting 100,000 to 200,000 deaths when those numbers were put out during a Trump press briefing. It was predicting a point estimate of 81,114.

Also, if you really want to interpret what is was projecting properly it was projecting a range of from 38,242 through 162,106 deaths. Now it is predicting from 26,487 through 155,315. That is not a huge change.

The most concerning part to me is that I saw Fauci interviewed by Brian Williams today and he acted as though the 100,000 through 200,000 range referenced in the press conference came from the same model that is now predicting a point estimate of about 61,000. That is not the case. It's a different model. I truly hope that Fauci was confused because if he was not he was intentionally misleading people.

[Silenoz]

Well this is America, and obesity is considered high risk, so I don't know about anything remotely close to 95%
https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-ar ... 15/5818333

Again, you let this thing run rampant, and most people are gonna deal with the shittiest cold of their lives for two weeks, and then maybe some breathing issues for another month. But for a chunk of the people you know, some of whom are under 50 and otherwise healthy, it's gonna be ventilation, intubation, possibly permanent lung or heart issues, and/or death. And when that overwhelms the ICU it's gonna be 5x as many deaths as it would have been.

It could take 18 months to develop a vaccine and can get this under control. Can we afford to keep shelter in place and other restrictions going for another 17 months? What is the bigger risk? The lives that might be lost or the damage to the economy (and resulting loss of jobs/access to healthcare and increased depression, addiction, suicides, etc.). At some point are we better off quarantining the those who are at the highest risk and moving forward?

The shelter as is will definitely end or change by June at the latest, as measures are lifted one by one. We'll still be distancing in some capacity for the rest of the year, but not like this.

[JohnStOnge]

BTW I noted the University of Washington model predictions of as this past Monday, April 6, for today, April 10. The predicted range was 18,379 through 27,270 cases. That was before the big deal about the model point estimate being revised downward to around 61,000.

As of now, according to the https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ site, the US case count is 18,719. So the model did OK even before it was revised. The actual case count for today is within the range predicted before the estimates were revised down a little. Also, the count will probably go up some. The next point I documented for the model as it was as of Monday, April 6, is April 15. At that time it predicted the range of 26,694 through 54,523 cases.

[kalm]

Well this is America, and obesity is considered high risk, so I don't know about anything remotely close to 95%
https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-ar ... 15/5818333

Again, you let this thing run rampant, and most people are gonna deal with the shittiest cold of their lives for two weeks, and then maybe some breathing issues for another month. But for a chunk of the people you know, some of whom are under 50 and otherwise healthy, it's gonna be ventilation, intubation, possibly permanent lung or heart issues, and/or death. And when that overwhelms the ICU it's gonna be 5x as many deaths as it would have been.

It could take 18 months to develop a vaccine and can get this under control. Can we afford to keep shelter in place and other restrictions going for another 17 months? What is the bigger risk? The lives that might be lost or the damage to the economy (and resulting loss of jobs/access to healthcare and increased depression, addiction, suicides, etc.). At some point are we better off quarantining the those who are at the highest risk and moving forward?

Yes. Once we know more about the disease, it’s capabilities for mutation, second waves, re-infection, etc. Testing also needs to be more available, quicker, and reliable. Once we know hospital systems won’t be overwhelmed...and it’s looking that way more and more...then groups and regional hotspots can be isolated for more restrictive containment strategies. The sooner certain states and selfish idiots pitch in the sooner that happens.

[Gil Dobie]

Ok. I posted a while back in this thread that I thought the Administration was using inflated death estimates during a press conference in order to be able to later come back and claim that they did a good job. Now the news is full of the story that 100,000 to 200,000 deaths were predicted but a new estimate is about 61,000.

Here is the problem: There was never any reference to where that 100,000 to 200,000 range came from. The model that they're referring to as now predicting about 61,000 is the University of Washington model. As I type it is providing a point estimate of 61,545 deaths.

Problem is, THAT model wasn't predicting 100,000 to 200,000 deaths when those numbers were put out during a Trump press briefing. It was predicting a point estimate of 81,114.

Also, if you really want to interpret what is was projecting properly it was projecting a range of from 38,242 through 162,106 deaths. Now it is predicting from 26,487 through 155,315. That is not a huge change.

The most concerning part to me is that I saw Fauci interviewed by Brian Williams today and he acted as though the 100,000 through 200,000 range referenced in the press conference came from the same model that is now predicting a point estimate of about 61,000. That is not the case. It's a different model. I truly hope that Fauci was confused because if he was not he was intentionally misleading people.

I heard 80,000 to 150,000 during a previous briefing. Checked the model at that time and it was around 80,000. Lot of info to keep up with if you miss one briefing.

Shelter on place is working. Wish some one other than Trump would lead the briefings. Speaks like a 5th grader.

[CID1990]

Ok. I posted a while back in this thread that I thought the Administration was using inflated death estimates during a press conference in order to be able to later come back and claim that they did a good job. Now the news is full of the story that 100,000 to 200,000 deaths were predicted but a new estimate is about 61,000.

Here is the problem: There was never any reference to where that 100,000 to 200,000 range came from. The model that they're referring to as now predicting about 61,000 is the University of Washington model. As I type it is providing a point estimate of 61,545 deaths.

Problem is, THAT model wasn't predicting 100,000 to 200,000 deaths when those numbers were put out during a Trump press briefing. It was predicting a point estimate of 81,114.

Also, if you really want to interpret what is was projecting properly it was projecting a range of from 38,242 through 162,106 deaths. Now it is predicting from 26,487 through 155,315. That is not a huge change.

The most concerning part to me is that I saw Fauci interviewed by Brian Williams today and he acted as though the 100,000 through 200,000 range referenced in the press conference came from the same model that is now predicting a point estimate of about 61,000. That is not the case. It's a different model. I truly hope that Fauci was confused because if he was not he was intentionally misleading people.

You also posted not long ago that you didn’t think this virus was much different from the flu so your record ain’t much better, OCDOnge


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CAA Flagship]

Ok. I posted a while back in this thread that I thought the Administration was using inflated death estimates during a press conference in order to be able to later come back and claim that they did a good job. Now the news is full of the story that 100,000 to 200,000 deaths were predicted but a new estimate is about 61,000.

Here is the problem: There was never any reference to where that 100,000 to 200,000 range came from. The model that they're referring to as now predicting about 61,000 is the University of Washington model. As I type it is providing a point estimate of 61,545 deaths.

Problem is, THAT model wasn't predicting 100,000 to 200,000 deaths when those numbers were put out during a Trump press briefing. It was predicting a point estimate of 81,114.

Also, if you really want to interpret what is was projecting properly it was projecting a range of from 38,242 through 162,106 deaths. Now it is predicting from 26,487 through 155,315. That is not a huge change.

The most concerning part to me is that I saw Fauci interviewed by Brian Williams today and he acted as though the 100,000 through 200,000 range referenced in the press conference came from the same model that is now predicting a point estimate of about 61,000. That is not the case. It's a different model. I truly hope that Fauci was confused because if he was not he was intentionally misleading people.

You live in the fantasy land of polls and models.
And then are disappointed when they are wrong.

[CAA Flagship]

[SDHornet]

I understand the measures, but now we're at the point (or will soon be) in which a decision will need to be made to allow society to go back to "normal". But there won't be a vaccine so how long do we hold out? How many more people have to lose their jobs in that time frame?

Let's not forget that the economy is health in that it provide wealth to buy healthcare, medicine, well being, etc.

I don’t necessarily disagree. I’ve got friends that are terrified of how they’ll pay rent or feed their kids. How much of this is an overreaction? Due to poor response?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good questions, unfortunately we probably won't know until this is well behind us but probably a portion of both.

[SDHornet]

Back to their lives. By all getting infected at the same time. That's how many hospitilizations at 10% of those who are infected? 5%? 3%? How big are Sacramento's hospitals?

There's a reason a White House with the most economy-obsessed President in history, and a huge number of Republican governers, have had no choice but to eat crow and backtrack on this shit.

Lol. There wasn't a surge here in CA. Lately there have been BS articles making claims that CA has herd immunity and this thing was supposedly here this past fall. Yes people would have died had nothing been done, but people are dying anyways. Right now it stands at a 3.7% death rate of US cases. These draconian measures taken only benefit a minuscule amount of people and that is the issue.

Also how do we come back from this? Stay shuttered up until a vaccine? Would like to know how you, or someone with that stance explains when it's OK to come outside again.

[CAA Flagship]

I don’t necessarily disagree. I’ve got friends that are terrified of how they’ll pay rent or feed their kids. How much of this is an overreaction? Due to poor response?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good questions, unfortunately we probably won't know until this is well behind us but probably a portion of both.

It's a pandemic. People will suffer one way or another. No matter how much you study this years later, there will be no way to determine what was done right and what was done wrong. The more you lean to one side, you hurt the other.

[SDHornet]

Good questions, unfortunately we probably won't know until this is well behind us but probably a portion of both.

It's a pandemic. People will suffer one way or another. No matter how much you study this years later, there will be no way to determine what was done right and what was done wrong. The more you lean to one side, you hurt the other.

Agree. And shuttering the economy is hurting even more people, possibly longer than this pandemic will (I don't see a lot of mom and pop shops coming back from this).

[kalm]

BTW I noted the University of Washington model predictions of as this past Monday, April 6, for today, April 10. The predicted range was 18,379 through 27,270 cases. That was before the big deal about the model point estimate being revised downward to around 61,000.

As of now, according to the https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ site, the US case count is 18,719. So the model did OK even before it was revised. The actual case count for today is within the range predicted before the estimates were revised down a little. Also, the count will probably go up some. The next point I documented for the model as it was as of Monday, April 6, is April 15. At that time it predicted the range of 26,694 through 54,523 cases.

Good stuff right here. Thanks JSO.

[HI54UNI]

Michigan's donk governor ordered stores to close their plant and garden centers which means people can't buy seed to plant their own gardens.



https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/ ... 131283002/

[Gil Dobie]

It could take 18 months to develop a vaccine and can get this under control. Can we afford to keep shelter in place and other restrictions going for another 17 months? What is the bigger risk? The lives that might be lost or the damage to the economy (and resulting loss of jobs/access to healthcare and increased depression, addiction, suicides, etc.). At some point are we better off quarantining the those who are at the highest risk and moving forward?

The shelter as is will definitely end or change by June at the latest, as measures are lifted one by one. We'll still be distancing in some capacity for the rest of the year, but not like this.

The Minnesota Governor mentioned lifting some of the Shelter in Place restrictions in the near future. Still think the hospitals would get over-run even with the high-risk people in quarantine.

[BDKJMU]

Michigan's donk governor ordered stores to close their plant and garden centers which means people can't buy seed to plant their own gardens.



https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/ ... 131283002/

How retarded is that. This section of the store is open. That section is closed. Someone needs to tell that dumb bitch that its Spring planting time.
To think Biden might pick that her as his VP lol..

[bobbythekidd]

I don't see a lot of mom and pop shops coming back from this.

That's what I'm afraid of as well. They just don't have the deep pockets to keep any of their dedicated employees, or even themselves, afloat during this. They will do well just to be able to buy food during this. I don't know what the implications of unemployment will be, but I assume they under report their salary or don't take as much and let the business buy home supplies as a business expense or get to use their "for resale purpose" cards. This can really hurt them when these things get evaluated for compensation.

Small businesses don't have the luxury of paying their folks when they aren't making them money. Rent is going to be almost impossible for a store that sells soap, haircuts, clothes, boutiques, make up, etc. Where will they find the capitol to reopen? Tom wouldn't lend them a dime (not a dig on him, they failed and have nothing. It's just a model he has to consider. He is our resident banker. Maybe I'm wrong)